[RE]

Here's an example of the inability to build enough infrastructure in a city built on the Suburban model and the use of the automobile with the rapid population increase.

Old cities like NY or Mexico City built before the automobile have had 8M people, and 20M in the surrounding Metroplex for decades.  DFW however is a sprawling metropolis of 2 cities combined, Dallas and Fort Worth all hooked together by ribbons of interstate highways and a ring road.



There's no real public transportation to speak of.  Distances are so vast even cycling around means you have to be a touring cyclist.  The city planning of ring road and N-S, E-W connectors was used all over the FSoA beginning in the 1950s with the Eisenhower Interstate. Atlanta, Indianapolis, St. Louis and Oklahoma City all have similar plans.  Here is Atlanta's famous "Spaghetti Junction":



There's no more room to widen roads to accomodate more carz.  They would have to make the main thoroughfares double-decker, but even that wouldn't work because the local roads would all be overwhelmed.  I drove all these roads in my big rig 30 years ago.  The traffic was bad then.  I can't imagine how bad it is now.

This is REAL Limits to Growth.

https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/dfw-cannot-build-out-of-traffic-troubles/3546490/

DFW Metroplex cannot 'build out' of traffic troubles

RE

[TDoS]

Children who do not leave home do not contribute to maintaining the home or offsetting expenses.

Says who? I understand the rule of us geriatrics not discussing "them", but this statement makes no sense in light of experience.

[K-Dog]

Children who do not leave home do not contribute to maintaining the home or offsetting expenses.

Says who? I understand the rule of us geriatrics not discussing "them", but this statement makes no sense in light of experience.

Says me, and we need the whole quote.

Children who do not leave home do not contribute to maintaining the home or offsetting expenses.  There is no magic moment when they have an epiphany telling them it is time to stop being a useless eater and pull their weight.

Road to Damascus moments are never a given, so there really is not much to defend here.  We are living in a time where the necessities in life are taken for granted.  Previous generations had more of a 'but for the grace of god go we' sort of attitude.  They were pragmatic, and while superstitious they did not believe in magic.  Like stuff just happens.
    Growing up in the geriatric generation and living at home with your parents meant you were a 'wuse'.  Something was wrong with you , and you were shunned.  People who did not take care of their own shit were looked down upon.  But somewhere in our land of unearned riches this all changed.  Once working kids were shown the door at 18.  That was the way it was.  Graduate high school and you were on your own.  You were no longer a child, you were an adult.  Like it or not.  Now things have changed, and a free ride is not looked down upon.
    Society moved into phase where the values of individual work and sacrifice represented by previous generations are considered outdated and irrelevant by current culture.  Consumption and instant gratification now define American values.  This has been true for a while, but we have entered a terminal phase.

    Concerning the need for the whole quote.

There is no magic moment when they have an epiphany

    Circumstances make men.  In extended adolescence men cannot be made.

* Your personal experience may be different, and that is fine.  My statement is a sweeping generalization of social conditions and is not meant to be personal.  In personal circumstances YMMV.  Specifically my statement came from the results of a study that examined how much children who worked but lived at home contributed to the household compared to those who lived at home without a job.  Those who worked contributed in all ways more than young men who did not, and we are not talking about money.  This is a studied fact.



And my sweeping generalization is factual. 

[RE]

In the Vietnam era, college went from something only the children of the elite attend to a requirement for getting any kind of white collar job.  Many new community colleges opened up which didn't have dorms.   Then in the 80s they raised the drinking age from 18 to 21.  This effectively extended adolescence from 18 to 21.

In the 00's, to get a good white collar job you needed a minimum of a Master's, plus the housing market got tight.  Finish your MS you're ~25 and loaded with debt.  You move back home while you job search.  If you're lucky you find a job that pays enough to afford an apartment after 1-2yrs at home.  You're 26 if everything went smooth and you didn't take a year off to see the world.

RE

[TDoS]

There is no magic moment when they have an epiphany

Circumstances make men.  In extended adolescence men cannot be made.
* Your personal experience may be different, and that is fine.

This I can buy. As my personal experience is NOT different.

Circumstances most certainly made me the man I am today. Age of 19 I believe, so the timing of your overall argument seems reasonable.

[monsta666]

Getting established i.e. getting a good job that pays well, a house and all the big milestones that are associated with adulthood is getting harder. Even if one is hardworking and willing to do the grind it is not likely you will be able to complete these steps before you are in your 30s. I am not convinced this generation is less mature than previous ones. People are simply a product of their times and given the lack of opportunities it is harder to get ahead. This lack of opportunities can also lead to people simply abandoning common convention aka the journey of life.

What I mean by the journey of life is people no longer see the point in owning a house, the value of car ownership is less important today than it was in the 80s. From what I have heard this is true even in the youth of the US. More and more people are eschewing kids and marriage as the costs (financial, emotional) are too high. To some this refusal to follow lifes common path may be seen as act of immaturity but to others is simply a practical decision given the circumstances of the time. I don't think people are extrinsically less mature than before; they are simply responding to the prevailing conditions of today. The way they are acting is going against the historic norms and it is this decision not to follow the "chosen path" that is what make people question their maturity.

Maybe it is doom in me that is speaking but I think this environment is actually hostile to people forming families having kids and housing all your family in one big home. Just look what was said in the previous posts; you now need a degree even a masters to get something that resembles a middle class job. After that you need a few years of hard work to get yourself on a sound financial footing. Now ask me after doing all that how old will you be?

After you achieve all that you then need to save for a deposit on a house and if you are lucky (unlucky?) save for a wedding. My bet is after you achieve all that you will be in your early to mid 30s. Now if you are a woman how many years of fertility would you have left? This idea of having a white picket fence home, 2.1 kids and a dog just gets harder and harder to get as time passes.

Let's not forget the costs of raising a child (never mind several) is skyrocketing. As much as people look fondly on free range children it is simply not tolerated in modern society, children MUST be supervised at all times and you will be sent to child services if you let them loose without adult supervision too often. At the very least people will look down on your neglectful parenting style. Guess what? Clubs and child minders etc cost a bomb.

The fact this is a global phenomenon should tell you this is a systemic issue and is an not issue simply rooted in the youth being immature. It is a common past time to bash the young but I think those thoughts are largely mistaken and short sighted as people making such judgements often fail to consider all the aspects that are in play these days. This whole swing to right/populist voting is a big sign people (on a deep level) see the system as broken. The insane cost of living is a product of overpopulation which is again a problem of decreasing per capita energy consumption. You can't resolve these problems no matter what politician you install. Problem is penny hasn't dropped on last point for most of society. Given what is happening now I can only wonder what people will do when they realize the economy is broken on a fundamental level...

[RE]

Given what is happening now I can only wonder what people will do when they realize the economy is broken on a fundamental level...

By the time most of them realize it, it will be too late to do much more than roll over and die.

As you might suspect from my prior post on this topic, we both see this from the same POV.  For the most part, the lengthening time for a person to become independent of their parents is a direct result of the economic barriers presented by all the so-called "markers" of maturity.   Buying a house and raising kids is EXPENSIVE.  If you're reasonably intelligent and pragmatic, you won't do either one until you are pretty certain you'll be able to afford it long term.  How secure is your new career and potential for advancement.?  How stable is the general economy around you?

Besides economics, on the social end the women also are beginning careers, since even if you plan on marriage and kids, you'll need 2 incomes to save for the down payment.  So again, how long out of school does it take to establish yourself in some profession so you're not entry-level?  Say 5 years.  So if you got your Master's at 25, you're 30 before you could think of taking maybe 2 years off for the 1st kid, which has a learning curve of its own.  So why get married before you're ready to put one in the oven?  There's no other real good reason to tie yourself up with a marriage contract, just live together.

Finally, back on the economic end there's the Elephant in the Room.  Student Debt.  No prior generation has had to start out with such a huge hole to dig out of.  Only the children of 1%ers who at least helped to keep the tally under 6 figures can get out from under that in less than a decade.  I talked with the dentist here, both she and her partner who is also a dentist are almost 30 and still have a combined debt over $100K left to pay off.  Probably 5 more years before they have enough to sytart their own practice.  They won't buy a house until after that.

The fact this is a systemic problem should be obvious from the fact the situation is the same in all the industrialized countries.  Unless you come from rich parents, getting started in life takes a LONG time.

RE

[TDoS]

Given what is happening now I can only wonder what people will do when they realize the economy is broken on a fundamental level...

By the time most of them realize it, it will be too late to do much more than roll over and die.

As you might suspect from my prior post on this topic, we both see this from the same POV.

I'm more interested in K-Dogs point of view, as you and Monsta appear to be generalizing about children, as opposed to personal experience.

I think Monsta's overall view, based on likely/unlikely is reaosnable, but the chosen probability expression is not definitive. I do believe things might be harder for the younger generations, and most of the speculation Monsta has done seems reasonable. K-Dog and I both mght offer a fine tuning of the concepts obviously, for better or worse.

Certainly a direct determining factor is that children are not raised in a vacuum, or by society at large. Parents themselves are a variable that can't be ignored, or discounted. They alone could make the difference between a normal, likely outcome as expressed by Monsta...or most certainly not. Quite the independent variable in the mix, and one with the ability to completely skew the results even with the more difficult conditions of today (however we might describe "difficult").

For the most part, the lengthening time for a person to become independent of their parents is a direct result of the economic barriers presented by all the so-called "markers" of maturity.  Buying a house and raising kids is EXPENSIVE.  If you're reasonably intelligent and pragmatic, you won't do either one until you are pretty certain you'll be able to afford it long term.  How secure is your new career and potential for advancement.?  How stable is the general economy around you?

Or a direct result of parents who know well what you just wrote...and tip the scales in the favor of their children.

Finally, back on the economic end there's the Elephant in the Room.  Student Debt.  No prior generation has had to start out with such a huge hole to dig out of.

From personal experience I can't say this is an absolute. Like a farm boy without a pot to piss in decades ago could go to college any other way.

A potential Illuminati Prince undoubtly might think such things are unncessary....poor farm boys certainly didn't have anyone unrolling a college education without debt in front of them...even in "way back" times.

[RE]

A potential Illuminati Prince undoubtly might think such things are unncessary....

Your narrative of my childhood is a complete fiction.

My parents are both Depression era children of poor immigrants.  My father was the first person to go to college of anyone on both sides.  He went to Pace College in NYC on the GI Bill.  He got into the Executivee Training Program at Chase with 2 other guys.  When I was born, we lived in an attached house in the working class section of Queens.  Lower middle class salary at the time.

He made it to VP in the International Dept and was posted to Brazil.  On an American ssalary in the 60s you could hire poor domestic help from the favelas.  This was as close to Illuminati as I got in those years.  My parents split up while in Brazil, and my mom brought me back to NY where we lived in a 1 1 bedroom apt.  She had $500 to live on until the divorce got finalized.  My dad put the down payment on a house in Queens, which my mom struggled to pay off for 25 years as a clerical worker with a HSE  Education.

When college came round, my dad welshed on paying for it, so I had to work-study and take loans to supplement my scholarship.  Had I known he was going to do that, I would have gone to CUNY. not Columbia.  I was always broke.

There was no silver spoon for me growing up in Queens, I mowed lawns and delivered groceries on my bike for spending money. It was an hour and a half commute each way on the subway for me to go to Stuyvesant.  I couldn't join any after school clubs or activities because it took so long.  I had virtually no friends.  Basically, life sucked from age 10 to 16 for me.  When I finally got out to go to college, I went wild with drugs and girls.  School was easy for me, mostly I didn't go to class just crammed for tests.

Anyhow my life has nothing to do with the problems of the current generation, and neither does yours.

RE

[TDoS]

A potential Illuminati Prince undoubtly might think such things are unncessary....

Your narrative of my childhood is a complete fiction.

If memory serves, you were the one who mentioned being "groomed" by the Illuminati. I remembered the word. I believe it was of a reference to what happened sometime during your high school years?

Anything I know about your background in any way came from you personally.

He made it to VP in the International Dept and was posted to Brazil.  On an American ssalary in the 60s you could hire poor domestic help from the favelas.  This was as close to Illuminati as I got in those years.  My parents split up while in Brazil, and my mom brought me back to NY where we lived in a 1 1 bedroom apt.  She had $500 to live on until the divorce got finalized.  My dad put the down payment on a house in Queens, which my mom struggled to pay off for 25 years as a clerical worker with a HSE  Education. When college came round, my dad welshed on paying for it, so I had to work-study and take loans to supplement my scholarship.  Had I known he was going to do that, I would have gone to CUNY. not Columbia.  I was always broke. There was no silver spoon for me growing up in Queens, I mowed lawns and delivered groceries on my bike for spending money. It was an hour and a half commute each way on the subway for me to go to Stuyvesant.  I couldn't join any after school clubs or activities because it took so long.  I had virtually no friends.  Basically, life sucked from age 10 to 16 for me.  When I finally got out to go to college, I went wild with drugs and girls.  School was easy for me, mostly I didn't go to class just crammed for tests.

Remember when we discussed my recent experience with suits? You mentioned your extensive experience with them as a young man, how your father had taken you with him to all sorts of meetings and whatnot where you learned about them and their characteristics and whatnot?

How did this work out in between mowing lawns and being broke and delivering groceries? 3 hours of commuting during the school week? The pirate radio? No time for after school activities....but heading out to watch big deals get done with dad happened enough to teach you all you needed to know about suits?

I always thought that sort of backed up your Illuminati grooming claim in your high school and college years, as opposed to now where it is like....where did you even find the TIME?

Anyhow my life has nothing to do with the problems of the current generation, and neither does yours.
RE

Oh, I agree to some extent, but I do have experience with the current generation up close and personal. You never spawned, so you are free and clear of it all. But the "problems" of the current generations aren't a given, as Monsta said they fall into the probability of "more likely than unlikely", and there is that parent factor. No, not just the rich versus poor angle, but the REAL parents versus another brand of helicopter ones, or those who didn't even want the kids in the first place. Hey, post Vietnam sex stopped being a dirty word and abortions were legal and it was all smoking reefer and whatever other hedonistic lifestyles came along. As did the consequences of free love and birth control and...I dunno....more idiot adults having kids?

Sure, things got more expensive in terms of raising them and whatnot (EVERYTHING got more expensive, not just kid raising), but I find it hard to discount the behavior of the prior generations raising them as part of the causal factor here.

[RE]

The "grooming" you refer to was during the years in Brazil, playing chess against my dad's associates and state department apparatchiks and doing math tricks.  Later on I spent a couple of years being tested by psychologists and jumping through a variety of hoops.   All through those years at the various parties and picnics, I observed the behavior and dress of all the people involved, bankers, state dept, CIA and military.  I'm a good observer.

RE

[TDoS]

The "grooming" you refer to was during the years in Brazil, playing chess against my dad's associates and state department apparatchiks and doing math tricks.  Later on I spent a couple of years being tested by psychologists and jumping through a variety of hoops.   All through those years at the various parties and picnics, I observed the behavior and dress of all the people involved, bankers, state dept, CIA and military.  I'm a good observer.

RE

I see. So your insight is related to the more social aspects of how the movers and shakers behave, as opposed to being in the  room when they are going at the details hammer and tongs? I'm trying to think of any muliti-corporate or multi-national deal where that end of the deal was happening in a social environment. Social environemnts tended to be before we went into combat in some conference room, or after the details were hammered out among the financial/technical/legal heads of departments and their CEO.

Obviously our experience was gained in different decades and even centuries, and from different perspectives.

[RE]

For that time period, absolutely.  Then you add in my own time wearing the uniform working at Merrill and Drexel.  Didn't spend decades in the monkey suit, but the behaviors didn't change.  Same arrogance and self importance.

RE

[TDoS]

For that time period, absolutely.  Then you add in my own time wearing the uniform working at Merrill and Drexel.  Didn't spend decades in the monkey suit, but the behaviors didn't change.  Same arrogance and self importance.
RE

So...arrogance and self importance and....bankruptcy? Any correlation there?

[RE]

So...arrogance and self importance and....bankruptcy? Any correlation there?

Dunno if there is a correlation between the frequency of bankruptcy by dress code, but I suspect a correlation by magnitude.  Suits have higher incomes, so the bankruptcies would tend to be bigger.

RE